Are we surprising?

[Edwardo Piet]

Is there anything surprising about humanity? Or are we all, when it comes down to it, ultimately predictable?

Thoughts?

[Darwinian]

This depends upon whom the proposition is being directed towards. You may find some things that humans do to be surprising whereas I might not, and vice-versa.

[Edwardo Piet]

So that means some people are surprised by X and some people are not surprised by X. Of course.

But if someone is surprised by something does that mean that that thing is actually surprising? Does "surprising to them" equate to "surprising"? Or would you consider something only truly surprising if it was objectively and intrinsically surprising? And if so, assuming that nothing is objectively and intrinsically surprising - would you therefore think nothing was surprising? People get surprised by nothing that is actually - objectively, intrinsically - surprising?

Would you consider it similar to the problem of Universals? For example, if "surprisingness" is merely the sum of the experience all surprised beings in the universe, then surprisingness exists. If however, "surprisingness" is supposed to be some value that exists separate to the surprise of surprised beings in the universe, then "surprisingness" itself doesn't exist, it is merely a concept. Do you agree? And if so, which view would you subscribe to? Or would you be happy to agree with either and it's just a matter of perspective?

[Darwinian]

"People get surprised by nothing is actually surprising?" is a contradictory statement.

The only way that something can have the property of 'surprising' is to properly define the property of 'expected'. Therefore if somethings behaviour contradicts what is expected (by everyone) then you could classify it as surprising.

---

From a theistic point you could also argue that God can predict everything and so, from his point of view, nothing is surprising. This leads us to an interesting problem.. If God cannot be surprised he cannot be omnipotent. Alternatively, if he can be surprised then he cannot be omniscient. But, he certainly can't be both.

[Edwardo Piet]

"People get surprised but nothing is actually surprising?" isn't a contradictory statement if the fact people get surprised is defined as merely subjective surprise and "the surprising" or "surprisingness" is defined as objective and supposedly more than just the objective fact of the subjective experience of surprise.

I'm not disputing the definition of "surprising" I am disputing whether we think "the surprising" or "suprisingness" refers to an objective matter or a subjective matter. I am alluding to the problem of Universals because I think it could apply here, or we could at least draw an analogy.

I'm pretty sure I already addressed this in my last post, but hopefully I've made it a bit clearer now.

Finally I will give an example about why I think this distinction matters: What if we replace "surprising" with another subjective matter like "good"? Or "Great"? Or "Brilliant"?

For example, if I say that Orbital are a "brilliant" band - simply because they happen to be my favourite band - is that merely claiming "brilliant to me" or is that actually an objective claim of brilliance that has to be disputed as true or false, simply because I didn't say "in my opinion", or "I think"?

And if it just means "Brilliant to me" then does that mean the "Brilliance of Orbital" exists simply because there are people, such as myself, who find them brilliant? Or would you instead say that they aren't brilliant, I just think they are, it's a subjective matter, a matter of opinion, etc, etc. In which case I can draw the analogy with surprising: "Nothing is actually surprising, we just think things are, and get surprised and say they are "surprising". Just as nothing is actually good or bad, we just think there are, and so react accordingly and say they are "good" or "bad"".

[Darwinian]

"People get surprised but nothing is actually surprising?" isn't a contradictory statement

Ah, but that's not what you originally said! You said, "People get surprised by nothing is actually surprising?"

[Edwardo Piet]

The "by" was a typo. What would that even mean? Hence why it was a typo. I hope I've cleared that up now.

Furthermore, note that the above quote - quoted by you - has been taken out of context and so could easily be refuted, because in itself it may be an example of Quote Mining.

[Darwinian]

[Edwardo Piet]

Does that mean you take my point now? Or do you have some more objections?

[Darwinian]

Yes